Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 03 Feb 2018 (Saturday) 09:40
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Question about "Dust" in Lens

 
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
22,942 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 353
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
Post edited 9 months ago by ed rader.
     
Feb 03, 2018 15:06 |  #16

it's funny how dust in a lens or a coin taped to the front element or scratches on a front element will not affect IQ but if you mention protective filters you face biblical wrath :-P


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, 35mm ef-s macro, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L, gitzo GM4562, markins Q10, markins Q3, kirk, really right stuff, sirui

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
7,289 posts
Gallery: 281 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 9535
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Feb 03, 2018 15:13 |  #17

ed rader wrote in post #18555627 (external link)
it's funny how dust in a lens or a coin taped to the front element or scratches on a front element will not affect IQ but if you mention protective filters you face biblical wrath :-P

Right!!

That's because folks go out of their way to pay big money for those filters!

For the record, I don't think filters (or often window glass either) affect IQ much, except in some special situations.


Pentax Spotmatic F with 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 50/1.8, 135/3.5; Canon digital gear
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,640 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Likes: 501
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Feb 03, 2018 19:48 |  #18

Bogino wrote in post #18555432 (external link)
I was mainly curious and trying to understand the relevancy or irrelevancy of dust in lenses. Thx.

Because a lot of photographers are OCD and the folks selling lenses do not want buyers that are going to complain about a bit of dust in the lens. You can pretty much ignore that 'disclosure' when buying a lens, unless perhaps they use the word 'chunk' of dust. Even then it might not be a problem.


Edward Jenner
5DIII, 7DII, M6, GX1 II,M11-22, Sig15mm FE,16-35 F4,TS-E 17,Sig 18-250 OS Macro,M18-150,24-105,T45 1.8VC,70-200 f4 IS,70-200 2.8 vII,Sig 85 1.4,100L,135L,400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2725
Joined Oct 2015
     
Feb 03, 2018 20:45 |  #19

ed rader wrote in post #18555627 (external link)
it's funny how dust in a lens or a coin taped to the front element or scratches on a front element will not affect IQ but if you mention protective filters you face biblical wrath :-P

I think a lot of that is lens dependent. I put a $100+ B&W C-Pol on my brand new 100-400Lc about 10 years ago. That was my first outing with the lens. I thought it was broken. Almost every shot OOF, flare out the wazoo, and just plain ugly. I showed some shots to a fellow shooter. First thing he said was, "What lens?" Canon 100-400L, was the reply. "Take the filter off." He never even asked if I had a filter on it, but it cured the problem.

I am a confirmed hoodman, now. Filters only when I NEED them, and then only for a specific reason. Not trying to start a feud; merely stating my position.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2725
Joined Oct 2015
     
Feb 03, 2018 20:47 |  #20

ejenner wrote in post #18555822 (external link)
Because a lot of photographers are OCD and the folks selling lenses do not want buyers that are going to complain about a bit of dust in the lens. You can pretty much ignore that 'disclosure' when buying a lens, unless perhaps they use the word 'chunk' of dust. Even then it might not be a problem.

I once bought a Vivitar Series 1 lens of some sort off E-Bay. Buyer disclosed some 'dust'. I received a lens full of fungus. Directly to the trash can it went.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,640 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Likes: 501
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Feb 03, 2018 23:22 as a reply to  @ Bassat's post |  #21

That sucks. I bought a Vivitar lens with 'dust' from a store one ebay and it is less dusty than most of my new EF lenses.

But still,that disclosure was so far off the mark as to be a lie.


Edward Jenner
5DIII, 7DII, M6, GX1 II,M11-22, Sig15mm FE,16-35 F4,TS-E 17,Sig 18-250 OS Macro,M18-150,24-105,T45 1.8VC,70-200 f4 IS,70-200 2.8 vII,Sig 85 1.4,100L,135L,400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,640 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Likes: 501
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Feb 03, 2018 23:24 |  #22

Bassat wrote in post #18555850 (external link)
First thing he said was, "What lens?" Canon 100-400L, was the reply. "Take the filter off." He never even asked if I had a filter on it, but it cured the problem.

Exactly. Because he knew it was an issue specific to that lens.


Edward Jenner
5DIII, 7DII, M6, GX1 II,M11-22, Sig15mm FE,16-35 F4,TS-E 17,Sig 18-250 OS Macro,M18-150,24-105,T45 1.8VC,70-200 f4 IS,70-200 2.8 vII,Sig 85 1.4,100L,135L,400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
Avatar
5,265 posts
Gallery: 99 photos
Likes: 2594
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Feb 04, 2018 00:26 |  #23

Bassat wrote in post #18555850 (external link)
I think a lot of that is lens dependent. I put a $100+ B&W C-Pol on my brand new 100-400Lc about 10 years ago. That was my first outing with the lens. I thought it was broken. Almost every shot OOF, flare out the wazoo, and just plain ugly. I showed some shots to a fellow shooter. First thing he said was, "What lens?" Canon 100-400L, was the reply. "Take the filter off." He never even asked if I had a filter on it, but it cured the problem.

I am a confirmed hoodman, now. Filters only when I NEED them, and then only for a specific reason. Not trying to start a feud; merely stating my position.

I had a similar experience with my 400 5.6L prime. Filter was a Canon "sharp cut". It caused ugly bokeh. I was told that filter was actually made by Tiffen.
I did not really care who made it, removing it solved the problem.


Dave
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/12185187@N00/ (external link)
1DX2, 1D4, 1DS2. Canon, Sigma lenses
Image editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2725
Joined Oct 2015
     
Feb 04, 2018 02:21 |  #24

ejenner wrote in post #18555913 (external link)
That sucks. I bought a Vivitar lens with 'dust' from a store one ebay and it is less dusty than most of my new EF lenses.

But still,that disclosure was so far off the mark as to be a lie.

Exactly. But is was 10+ years ago. I think the winning bid was like $19 and $12 bucks for shipping. I didn't think getting a refund was worth the hassle, and I sure didn't want it near my other gear. Trash can = easy out. When you're buying 30+ year old stuff, you'll get a dud once in a while.

OTOH, I won a Yashica FX3-S2K dirt cheap because the 'mirror hits the back of the lens'. Five minutes with a hair-dryer to soften the mirror glue, push it back in place and an hour in the refrigerator fixed it just fine. Win some, lose some.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcoren
Senior Member
Avatar
581 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 265
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
     
Feb 04, 2018 07:51 |  #25

A couple of years ago, a LensRentals blog post described finding a fly deep inside a returned lens. You can read it here (external link).

The interesting part to me was at the very end:

We took dozens of images with the lens before taking the fly out. We shot stopped down, we shot at all parts of the zoom range. We focused close, we focused far. And in no image could we find the slightest hint that there was a fly in the lens. And you guys worry about a dust particle or two!

Mike


Canon EOS 7D Mark II, EOS M5, and EOS 100 (film SLR)
A bunch of Canon lenses and a couple of Sigmas
A backpack, a bicycle, and a pair of hiking boots

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,834 views & 17 likes for this thread
Question about "Dust" in Lens
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Xtonys2018
778 guests, 387 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.